Re: New, improved dpkg-source script
Ian Jackson writes:
>
> Changes:
> * Now supports `debian-special' archives. These contain an empty
> diff as the first thing and do not have a revision (this allows the
> program to recognise them as being distinct both from ordinary
> tarfiles and from `normal' source files). In order to create one
> you have to pass an empty string for the revision argument
> (omitting it is just too easy).
Once again the problem of debian-special packages. Could we please find a
common way for these packages? DPKG doe snot have a revision field in either
source or binary (it's dpkg-1.1.0.*). However, creating a package like this
fails since dchanges doesn't accept it. DCHANGES (a debian-special itself)
does have a revision (dchanges-2.0-7.*). Additionally there was some talk a
while ago to use revision 0 for debian-special files. So what do we do?
Personally I think we should use a revision, at least for packages that
offer programs that may be used without Debian, too. I think about packages
like Miquel's SYSVINIT or my WATCHDOG. With revision we can distinguish
between normal changes to the software itself and changes due to the Debian
environment.
Comments?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Lehrstuhl fuer angewandte Mathematik insb. Informatik
RWTH-Aachen, D-52056 Aachen, Germany
email: meskes@informatik.rwth-aachen.de
Reply to: